Lunar eclipse photography

Is anyone else planning to try and get a photo of tomorrow night's lunar
eclipse? I'm going to give it a try - I have an EOS 10D which I'll be using
with a Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM [1], with a Canon 1.4x teleconvertor. This
essentially makes it into a 420mm f/5.6, which gives me a field of view
roughly equivalent to a 680mm lens on a 35mm camera.

Looking around on the web, this suggests that I'll want to keep my exposure
under about 0.8 seconds if I want a sharp image, otherwise I'll get motion
blur (I don't have access to a tracking telescope). Could be challenging.
Hopefully I won't need to raise the ISO above 400.

[1] *Why* didn't I buy the f/2.8? Oh yes, it weighs a ton, and my wife would
have killed me. ;-)

Advertisements

Some of the best photos I have seen of an eclipse have been with
moderate telephoto lenses.

The trick is to take a series of images on the same frame. Make sure
the images don't overlap.

--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math

"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
news:...
> Is anyone else planning to try and get a photo of tomorrow night's lunar
> eclipse? I'm going to give it a try - I have an EOS 10D which I'll be
using
> with a Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM [1], with a Canon 1.4x teleconvertor. This
> essentially makes it into a 420mm f/5.6, which gives me a field of view
> roughly equivalent to a 680mm lens on a 35mm camera.
>
> Looking around on the web, this suggests that I'll want to keep my
exposure
> under about 0.8 seconds if I want a sharp image, otherwise I'll get motion
> blur (I don't have access to a tracking telescope). Could be challenging.
> Hopefully I won't need to raise the ISO above 400.
>
> [1] *Why* didn't I buy the f/2.8? Oh yes, it weighs a ton, and my wife
would
> have killed me. ;-)

Advertisements

Guest

The weather gods have been successfully propitiated! Though just to
make sure I have some more virgins, and an active volcano, should
clouds appear tomorrow evening.
> Looking around on the web, this suggests that I'll want to keep my exposure
> under about 0.8 seconds if I want a sharp image, otherwise I'll get motion
> blur (I don't have access to a tracking telescope).

google: "barn door tracker" (include the quotes). There are complex
ones, and very simple ones.

10D sensor is 22.5mm wide. With the 420mm lens, the horizontal field
of view is about atan(22.5/420)==3.1 degrees. At 3152 pixels, thats
9.8e-4 degrees/pixel. The Earth rotates at about 360/86164 == 4.2e-3
degrees/second, or about 4.2e-3/9.8e-4 == 4.3 pixels/second across the
width of the sensor.

So 0.8 seconds may be a bit long, but I don't think you'll need
exposures that long anyways: even eclipsed the Moon is fairly bright.
And tomorrow nights eclipse is not particularly deep.
> [1] *Why* didn't I buy the f/2.8? Oh yes, it weighs a ton,

Exercise.
> and my wife would have killed me. ;-)

"What doesn't kill me makes me stronger." -- Nietzsche said that,
though perhaps not in the same context...

In article <>,
<> wrote:
>
>10D sensor is 22.5mm wide. With the 420mm lens, the horizontal field
>of view is about atan(22.5/420)==3.1 degrees. At 3152 pixels, thats
>9.8e-4 degrees/pixel. The Earth rotates at about 360/86164 == 4.2e-3
>degrees/second, or about 4.2e-3/9.8e-4 == 4.3 pixels/second across the
>width of the sensor.
>
>So 0.8 seconds may be a bit long, but I don't think you'll need
>exposures that long anyways:

Here's hoping. This was much easier last time - I only had a D30 and a 300mm
lens ;-)
>> and my wife would have killed me. ;-)
>
>"What doesn't kill me makes me stronger." -- Nietzsche said that,
>though perhaps not in the same context...

"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Looking around on the web, this suggests that I'll want to keep my
exposure
> under about 0.8 seconds if I want a sharp image, otherwise I'll get motion
> blur (I don't have access to a tracking telescope). Could be challenging.
> Hopefully I won't need to raise the ISO above 400.

If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed around
1/125 second at ƒ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
such. I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.

In article <he%qb.48073$>,
PhotoMan <> wrote:
>
>If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed around
>1/125 second at ƒ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
>such.

Er, about this eclipse thing...
>I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.

"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
news:...
> In article <he%qb.48073$>,
> PhotoMan <> wrote:
> >
> >If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed
around
> >1/125 second at ƒ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
> >such.
>
> Er, about this eclipse thing...
>
> >I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.
>
> There wasn't an eclipse last night.

<< If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed around
1/125 second at Æ’ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
such. I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine. >>

PM-

Yes, it is a sunny day scene for the full moon. However, the moon is a gray
rock reported to have a reflectivity about one stop less than "neutral gray".
I'd give it an extra stop to begin with.

Then there's the eclipse. Fortunately it lasts for a while, so we should have
time to make several exposures until we get it right!

In article <Hr6rb.61404$>,
PhotoMan <> wrote:
>
>"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
>news:...
>> In article <he%qb.48073$>,
>> PhotoMan <> wrote:
>> >
>> >If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed
>around
>> >1/125 second at ƒ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
>> >such.
>>
>> Er, about this eclipse thing...
>>
>> >I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.
>>
>> There wasn't an eclipse last night.
>
>Perhaps I should have emphasized TEST.

So let me get this right - in order to determine the correct exposure for
the Moon when it is in the Earth's shadow, you performed a test shot of the
Moon in direct sunlight?

"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
news:...
> In article <he%qb.48073$>,
> PhotoMan <> wrote:
> >
> >If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed
around
> >1/125 second at f 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
> >such.
>
> Er, about this eclipse thing...
>
> >I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.
>
> There wasn't an eclipse last night.

"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
news:...
> In article <Hr6rb.61404$>,
> PhotoMan <> wrote:
> >
> >"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
> >news:...
> >> In article <he%qb.48073$>,
> >> PhotoMan <> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed
> >around
> >> >1/125 second at ƒ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed
as
> >> >such.
> >>
> >> Er, about this eclipse thing...
> >>
> >> >I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.
> >>
> >> There wasn't an eclipse last night.
> >
> >Perhaps I should have emphasized TEST.
>
> So let me get this right - in order to determine the correct exposure for
> the Moon when it is in the Earth's shadow, you performed a test shot of
the
> Moon in direct sunlight?

Yes, the moon IS in direct sunlight!

Perhaps you should reread my OP -
> >> >I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.< << <

Emphasis on TONIGHT. The whole point of my OP was that the moon is
illuminated by sunlight, so requires bright sunny daylight exposure
settings. The purpose of the test was to determine initial settings for when
the moon was still unshaded by the penumbra. I don't know how to explain it
more clearly for you.

"PhotoMan" <> wrote
>
> "Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
> news:...
> > In article <he%qb.48073$>,
> > PhotoMan <> wrote:
> > >
> > >If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed
> around
> > >1/125 second at f 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
> > >such.
> >
> > Er, about this eclipse thing...
> >
> > >I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.
> >
> > There wasn't an eclipse last night.
>
> Perhaps I should have emphasized TEST.

Not when I want to photograph it, won't be. That's sort of the point of this
thread.
>Emphasis on TONIGHT. The whole point of my OP was that the moon is
>illuminated by sunlight, so requires bright sunny daylight exposure
>settings. The purpose of the test was to determine initial settings for when
>the moon was still unshaded by the penumbra. I don't know how to explain it
>more clearly for you.

Given that my original post, which started this thread, was about minimising
motion blue using a 420mm lens when taking a photograph of a lunar eclipse,
perhaps you should have worked out that shouting exposing for daylight was
inappropriate.

On 11/8/03 1:28 PM, in article yhcrb.49260$,
"PhotoMan" <> wrote:
>
> "Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
> news:...
>> In article <Hr6rb.61404$>,
>> PhotoMan <> wrote:
>>>
>>> "Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> In article <he%qb.48073$>,
>>>> PhotoMan <> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed
>>> around
>>>>> 1/125 second at ƒ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed
> as
>>>>> such.
>>>>
>>>> Er, about this eclipse thing...
>>>>
>>>>> I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.
>>>>
>>>> There wasn't an eclipse last night.
>>>
>>> Perhaps I should have emphasized TEST.
>>
>> So let me get this right - in order to determine the correct exposure for
>> the Moon when it is in the Earth's shadow, you performed a test shot of
> the
>> Moon in direct sunlight?
>
> Yes, the moon IS in direct sunlight!
>
> Perhaps you should reread my OP -
>>>>> I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.< << <
>
> Emphasis on TONIGHT. The whole point of my OP was that the moon is
> illuminated by sunlight, so requires bright sunny daylight exposure
> settings. The purpose of the test was to determine initial settings for when
> the moon was still unshaded by the penumbra. I don't know how to explain it
> more clearly for you.
>
>
>
>
Some things just cannot be made clear to a dolt. Give up.

"George Kerby" <> wrote in message
news:BBD2B6A2.24976%...
> On 11/8/03 1:28 PM, in article
yhcrb.49260$,
> "PhotoMan" <> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
> > news:...
> >> In article <Hr6rb.61404$>,
> >> PhotoMan <> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> "Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:...
> >>>> In article <he%qb.48073$>,
> >>>> PhotoMan <> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed
> >>> around
> >>>>> 1/125 second at f 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed
> > as
> >>>>> such.
> >>>>
> >>>> Er, about this eclipse thing...
> >>>>
> >>>>> I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.
> >>>>
> >>>> There wasn't an eclipse last night.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps I should have emphasized TEST.
> >>
> >> So let me get this right - in order to determine the correct exposure
for
> >> the Moon when it is in the Earth's shadow, you performed a test shot of
> > the
> >> Moon in direct sunlight?
> >
> > Yes, the moon IS in direct sunlight!
> >
> > Perhaps you should reread my OP -
> >>>>> I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.< <<
<
> >
> > Emphasis on TONIGHT. The whole point of my OP was that the moon is
> > illuminated by sunlight, so requires bright sunny daylight exposure
> > settings. The purpose of the test was to determine initial settings for
when
> > the moon was still unshaded by the penumbra. I don't know how to explain
it
> > more clearly for you.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Some things just cannot be made clear to a dolt. Give up.

Share This Page

Welcome to Velocity Reviews!

Welcome to the Velocity Reviews, the place to come for the latest tech news and reviews.

Please join our friendly community by clicking the button below - it only takes a few seconds and is totally free. You'll be able to chat with other enthusiasts and get tech help from other members.
Sign up now!